View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

Chapter Seven – A Discussion – Page 211
historic accounts, linked to an article on the precarious institutional state of
psychoanalysis. This discussion includes a slip from the researcher as he endorses Judi’s
recommendation of a book, that he has read it on a subsequent occasion. 7 Eventually,
Paula enters, as it were in the role of patient (in the sense of referring to her experience
from that perspective) 8 in response to an apparently naive question to the tutors from
Tom about how often one should aim to go for therapy as a therapist in training. 9
The extract in which ‘the fishhook’ emerges comes at this point. After the extract, the
process of the discussion continues until the break in the middle of the session, and after
that the session concludes with the researcher’s clinical presentation. This concluding
part of Session 14, the presentation of extensive clinical case material by one of the
tutors (that is, the researcher) was not included as part of the analysis for reasons of
confidentiality. A transcript of the incident with some commentary follows on the next
two pages.
7 (Changing voice again) I am fairly certain that this slip on my own behalf represents a compromise
between the fact of having read the book and the strongly felt need to go and read it again. I consider this
to be an example of the unconscious phenomenon of condensation. With hindsight, I would now be more
honest with the group.
8 This is clinical shorthand, used to describe the way that an individual may present themselves to the
group, or the way that the group may invite or induce an individual to behave.
9 Although, like Ron’s question about mirroring, this question seems innocuous, it is not really a direct
response to the question asked by Bill – so, is it that Tom wants to be told how often to go, or for the
tutors to ask the group for him how often he should go?